Great Thread. The fact that Autumn and Marie chose to officially join their future spouses' churches is to be respected. The fact that Princess Maxima and Princess Michael of Kent chose to remain Catholics is to be respected also. My opinion is Autumn and Marie come from countries that have become increasingly secularised and they are more independent in their personal outlooks. They seemed to have arrived at their decision with businesslike resolve as to what is best for the family they will have. I even suspect they feel they have not given up any of their beliefs as they are just moving from one group of the Christian community to another.

Princess Maxima and Princess Michael in my view hail from countries whose cultures are steeped in Catholic traditions and that attachment is not easily dispensed with. It is to their credit that they managed to do a balancing act for the two communions in their family.

But this is just my opinion. Let's be happy for all of them. Incidentally, the Dutch Royal Family are members of the Dutch Reformed Church and not the Lutheran Church as stated in one of the previous posts.

I think her decision is shameful. It strikes me that she's not terribly religious to begin with, or she would not have so (seemingly) casually thrown aside her religious heritage.

How on earth could you possibly know it's casual? Stop projecting.

Quote:

Maybe this has something to do with the talk of switching the succession rules to a non-primogeniture system...if so, then Anne's children would be up after Charles'? Peter would be # 5 (Princess Bea's # if I'm not mistaken) if that came to pass.

No, they wouldn't, because...

Quote:

(Of course, the law would have to be retroactive to the direct issue of QEII.)

...would not happen. Any time any such act has come up for discussion, it's always been made abundantly clear that the line of succession as it is at the time of the act coming into force will be frozen. It is only children born after enactment that would be affected by the new laws. It's the only way to do it, otherwise how far back do you go?

Quote:

So, what about Autumn's heritage? I'm rather disappointed in her for doing this.

Perhaps her heritage is less important to her than her ability to share in her new family's?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth

I think it's inappropriate to judge motivations without knowing any background. It's possible that she isn't particularly religious, and it's also possible that she's making a major sacrifice in order to put her family first. Many of us have experience, either personally or with friends or family members, of the problems that can be caused by a marriage between people of different religions, espcially when it comes to deciding on the religion of any children born to the marriage.

And that right there was the sound of a hammer hitting a nail right on the head.

In many ways, it's actually easier to raise a child in, say, a mixed Jewish/Christian household than in two denominations of Christianity.

Princess Maxima and Princess Michael in my view hail from countries whose cultures are steeped in Catholic traditions and that attachment is not easily dispensed with. It is to their credit that they managed to do a balancing act for the two communions in their family.

Princess Michael of Kent grew up in Australia, she arrived in Sydney as a 4 year old. She only left Australia once she completed her education and lived in Austria for a very short time, a year or so before moving to the UK. I don't think Australia can be considered a country seeped in catholic tradition, the largest denomination is Anglican.

Sorry, I am referring to Austria (her part of Czechoslovakia was part of the Austrian Empire, wasn't it?) as her country of origin and where her family ties would be and that would dictate her traditional tendencies.

I am from the Pacific and I know Australia is a wonderful melting pot of different cultural groups but it would take several generations to get your roots completely out of your system.

Born in Carlsbad in Czechoslovakia present Karlovy Vary in the Czech Republic. After her parents divorce she, her mother Maria Anna Szapáry von Muraszombath, Széchysziget und Szapár, Countess Szapár and brother moved to Australia. In Sydney Marie-Christine attended Rose Bay Convent -private RC girls' scholl (nuns of the Sacred Heart order). Her first marriage was annulled by the RCC in 1978.

I think they made a very important decision as a couple. Surely she has been parttaking of his religious events for some time now, discussed it with her family and so on ..

It would be like saying Princess Mazima hates her father because she married into a family where the country would not even allow him to attend the wedding. There are many complicated reasons for many things.

God is God in my opinion and at least BOTH religions are based on aspects of Christianity, so the basic tenets are similar. I am sure her family encouraged her to convert. They had already been living together for so long anyway. She had already broken any basic "rules" of Catholicism: living together before marriage, birth control, etc .. She was obviously no longer a practising Catholic anyway.

R.

__________________"To truly know love for a moment, is to know love forever ..."

autumn said in the Hello pre-wedding interview that the reason she converted was to be the same religion as her children would be brought up into as this was important for her and she felt that they all worship the same God so it really wasnt a big matter

Nicely put. All worshipping the same God. We wish her well. She has done things which take courage including the interview without anyone else's "permission". After breaking a few "rules" and "norms" she will come to be known as the independent thinker amongst them. If she needed the money and it was a decent spread with nice clothes. I hope it helped them out. I know she has been heavily criticized for "selling out". She has already done a few things to accommodate them and earned the money prior to being on the civil list. (They are on the civil list, right?) I say leave them alone and let them to their happiness.

They aren't on the Civil List, and they don't do any royal engagements. Princess Anne's children wouldn't have been on the Civil List even before it was shrunk; she wanted them to grow up to be private citizens.

faith and wealth have nothing to do with each other. one can be wealthy and very faithful or poor and have no faith. autumn's decision to convert to another faith is being viewed, by some, like an act of treason...how sad.

What does a deal with "HELLO" magazine have to do with FAITH?
I was simply referring to her/their choice to do a paid photospread.
Everyone and the press seems to have a grande opinion about it.
It might seem like a public issue, but IMO they have a right to make
their own money. And perhaps she wanted to have some money of
her own on the scale she is marrying into? I doubt her salary would
compare.

It would also, I think, lessen attempts of photographers to try to compete for the best "wedding" shots, if the magazines knew that the photo rights to it had been sold- I think most most magazines would be leery of messing around in violations of copyright?

But that's just a random thought. I've seen celebrities that did that although I haven't seen any royalty do things that way.

__________________The shoe that fits one person pinches another; there is no recipe for living that suits all cases.
-Carl Gustav JungDo what you feel in your heart to be right for you'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do and damned if you don't.
-Eleanor Roosevelt

It's a silly law that is discriminatory and has no place in modern society and is insulting to those subjects of her majesty who are catholic-which are a lot.
To me it is completely unbelievable that such a law would still be in place. I dont think that Autumn was religious otherwise she wouldnt have changed her religion, but the very fact that she should feel the need to, whether she had to do it or not, is absurd.

The same (or similar, mutatis mutandis) rule exists in almost every other ruling family in world:

1. Princess Marie of Denmark had to convert before marrying Prince Joachim of Denmark. She was not forced to by law and Joachim wouldn't have lost his postion if the line of succession, but she was forced to convert by custom and tradition.
2. Queen Noor of Jordan converted to Islam, although she was not forced to by law - she could've been queen anyway, although her children would not be in the line of succession.
3. The Duke of Edinburgh was not forced to convert by law, but he has still converted.
4. Queen Sophia of Spain had to convert too (remember, her husband's accession was a small possibility back then), though I am not sure whether she was forced to by law.

The exception, of course, is the Royal Family of the Netherlands. If other countries have these unwritten rules, I don't see anything wrong with the British having it written down. Even if the law is changed, I doubt that any British prince would marry a Catholic, just like I doubt that any Spanish infante would marry a Protestant.